Skip to content

Google Search Console vs Modern Image Formats

Based on 3817 and 9 real audits

View Google Search Console details | View Modern Image Formats details
MetricGoogle Search ConsoleModern Image FormatsWinner
Performance4455Modern Image Formats
Accessibility8890Modern Image Formats
Best Practices8685Google Search Console
SEO9091Modern Image Formats
Security6768Modern Image Formats
TTFB346ms416msGoogle Search Console
Composite7376Modern Image Formats
Performance
Google Search Console
44
Modern Image Formats
55
Accessibility
Google Search Console
88
Modern Image Formats
90
Security
Google Search Console
67
Modern Image Formats
68
SEO
Google Search Console
90
Modern Image Formats
91
Composite
Google Search Console
73
Modern Image Formats
76

Modern Image Formats outperforms Google Search Console in 5 of 7 categories, with a stronger composite score (76 vs 73). Google Search Console leads in best practices, TTFB.

When to choose Google Search Console

Choose Google Search Console when your primary concern is server response time and best practices. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.

When to choose Modern Image Formats

Choose Modern Image Formats when your primary concern is performance and accessibility. Its audit data shows consistent strength in these areas across the sampled sites.

How this comparison was built

Scores are medians across 3817 audited Google Search Console sites and 9 audited Modern Image Formats sites in the BeaverCheck database. Every audit runs the same 100+ checks — Lighthouse performance, security headers, accessibility, SEO, server response time — against a real URL. No vendor input, no sponsorship, no affiliate links. Read the full methodology →

Small sample: one or both technologies have fewer than 10 audited sites. Treat these numbers as directional — medians stabilize around 20–30 audits per side.

FAQ

Which is faster, Google Search Console or Modern Image Formats?
Based on real BeaverCheck audits, Modern Image Formats sites score higher on Lighthouse performance (55 vs 44 on average).
Which has better security, Google Search Console or Modern Image Formats?
Modern Image Formats sites score higher on security analysis (68 vs 67 on average).
Which has better accessibility, Google Search Console or Modern Image Formats?
Accessibility scores measured by Lighthouse WCAG 2.1 checks favor Modern Image Formats (90 vs 88). Both technologies can be made fully accessible with care — the difference reflects common patterns in the sampled sites, not inherent platform limits.
Which is better for SEO, Google Search Console or Modern Image Formats?
Modern Image Formats sites score higher on Lighthouse SEO signals (91 vs 90 on average), which cover meta tags, crawlability, mobile friendliness, and structured data. Content strategy and backlinks still matter more than platform choice for ranking.
Which has faster server response (TTFB), Google Search Console or Modern Image Formats?
Google Search Console sites show lower Time to First Byte (346 ms vs 416 ms on average). TTFB depends heavily on hosting and CDN setup rather than the technology itself, but the sampled sites suggest a meaningful difference in common deployment patterns.
Should I choose Google Search Console or Modern Image Formats for my website?
Both platforms have trade-offs. Modern Image Formats scores higher on overall composite score while Google Search Console may excel in metrics you care about most. Run a free BeaverCheck audit on a real site using each to compare the metrics relevant to your use case.
Audit your own site

Send Feedback